Selections

Guest Discussion
21

Jim,

Joe! Trying my best! :wink: Donnez moi un break, as our friends in France would say! (Again, for clarity, :wink: – this is all in genial tone.)

Roger. Break given. (BTW, I love it when you speak french! It remind’s me of my TB20 - an acutal airplane!) :wink:

My first response to you was about, ummm, “issues” – I was arguing why, in my view, a case against Cirrus would not be justified. To which you replied: Well, it IS going to happen. To which I said: I don’t think so, and I’ll make a bet!
True, and I concede the point that a lawsuit is not very likely for practical reasons. And I admit to using the specter of legal action partly as an excuse to raise the issues of breech of faith, etc.
To sneak back into the mire of legalism, breach of contract requires violation of what is explicitly stated (or distinctly if implicitly promised) in the contract itself. Did your contract with Cirrus say that if they didn’t deliver on the target date, they’d give you back the money with interest, or compensate you for frustrated hopes in some way? Mine sure didn’t. It said that a number of things would apply if they didn’t meet that date: I wouldn’t have to make further progress payments, the CPI clock would stop running, etc.
I agree, especially with the “implicitly promised” part. I just think that there was an implicit promise to concentrate on producing SR20’s, not SR22’s. As evidence I submit, once again, Cirrus’ touting of the ramp-up to one-a-day. Implicit in that was that they would be producing SR20’s at that rate.

Again, to sue them for breach, you have to show that they violated a promise they made as part of the deal. You could argue, if you want, that their decision to shift to 22 production constitutes such a breach. I am simply saying (Issues Mode: ON) that I do not believe this to be a powerful argument. CRUCIAL QUESTION: what EXACTLY is the part of the contract Cirrus has violated?

The implicit part. See above.

Legal actions are, well, legalistic, and the burden is on the plaintiff to show EXACTLY what promise the company broke. It can’t just be, “I’ve had to wait too long for my plane!”

ThatÂ’s not my argument. My argument is that they took $15 grand from SR20 depositors with at least the implicit understanding that that money would be spent in ramping up SR20 production. LetÂ’s say, for argument, that the K brothers decided theyÂ’d have to go back to yacht building for a while to make a profit, and persuaded some position holders to agree swap their plane for a yacht. How would you feel about Duluth pumping out boats for a couple of months, with your deposit?

(Issues Mode: STILL ON). That is why I said it’s a COMMERCIAL matter, not a LEGAL one. Cirrus made a strategic decision, knowing that it would lose some customer goodwill. To say that a policy makes some customers angry is not the same as saying (a) that it’s illegal or actionable or (b) that it’s a mistake. It could be a mistake, but that’s for the market to sort out – how many people Cirrus pisses off, versus whatever benefits the 22 emphasis brings.

I respectfully disagree. I maintain that a bait-and-switch argument could be made, as well as one for breech of (implicit) contract.

And if you come back saying, “well somebody’s still going to sue,” then I’m going to go back into “Bet” mode – let me know if you’re interested at 1/100th the previous level. :wink:

Alright already. I concede that itÂ’s farfetched, especially in light of your persuasive arguments as to why it would be impractical. No bet. You win on this point.

(Issues Mode: OFF. Genial Mode: CONTINUING)

BTW, I readily admit to doing some “pot stirring” here.

Cheers,

Joe

22

The klaps just want to deliver.The financial situation got really tight and they somehow are getting past it.I seriously doubt they had any intentions of the bait and switch.If you knew these guys you would know their only concern is to produce a fine aircraft for you guys.In this day and age that takes balls.I dont know who makes up the production schedule.I have an I dea but not sure.All this bait and switch talk is for the used car guy on the corner.Not the klapmiers.They really are good guys.Somebody though in managment should crunch some numbers for deliveries so you can sleep at night.Some good acurate numbers.

23

Whether you agree with me or not, you all have to admit one thing: At least I got Jeff to say something nice about Cirrus!

Joe

The klaps just want to deliver.The financial situation got really tight and they somehow are getting past it.I seriously doubt they had any intentions of the bait and switch.If you knew these guys you would know their only concern is to produce a fine aircraft for you guys.In this day and age that takes balls.I dont know who makes up the production schedule.I have an I dea but not sure.All this bait and switch talk is for the used car guy on the corner.Not the klapmiers.They really are good guys.Somebody though in managment should crunch some numbers for deliveries so you can sleep at night.Some good acurate numbers.

24

Whether you agree with me or not, you all have to admit one thing: At least I got Jeff to say something nice about Cirrus!

Joe

Yeah, if it IS Jeff! This highlights the very problem we’ve been talking about: neither of us has any way of knowing whether the “Jeff” who just posted this sweetness-and-light message is the same one who did the other “Jeff” postings – or whether it was, say, me, just using his name and applying random typos. (By the way, it wasn’t me.)

For an example of this problem, check out the reply to Jeff’s “sayonara” message a few notes down.

25

For an example of this problem, check out the reply to Jeff’s “sayonara” message a few notes down.

Yes its me.I am done posting as I guess my words are to no value.Hope it all goes great with your planes…didnt mean to stir you guys up. I do love the ac as it is a brilliant design.Cirrus will take care of you. I just disagree on how they string you guys along on the delivery dates.Just demand some honest dates. Nice chatting and posting here.take care all - jeff

26

I am not a disgruntled employee.I am just telling you info they won’t.They tell us -20’s wont start till -22’s are caught up.Whenever that is.I don’t see any of them even close right now.If they hadnt switched to the -22 production, money would have been poor and who knows what could have happened.I believe the -22 deliveries really helped the company money wise and kept the creditors paid.

As expected, phoney e-mail address for this jerk.

27

Bearing in mind that Aviation Consumer is not accepted by all readers of this forum as an authoritative source of aviation information and that the so called “rag” is not worth the price of it’s subscription, it is significant to point out in this particular thread that, at least to some, from the consumer’s point of view (not Cirrus’s unit profit) that the SR22 is a better value than the SR20.

Without quoting from their copyrighted article, they made two points (1) that for the additional $60,750 that the '22’s speed, usefull load and range more than make up for the difference and that (2) the GA market needs a Mooney/Piper/Lancair beater in the '22. They also observe that the current one year backlog on the '22 is a competative advantage on the two year backlong of the '20.

So, from the consumer’s point of view, at least as expressed by Aviation Consumer (yeh, I know, that rag) the SR22 is a better value.

28

As expected, phoney e-mail address for this jerk.

This “Jerk” is on the production line and very proud of my work.Cirrus would fire me in a second if I gave my identity.

29

Bearing in mind that Aviation Consumer is not accepted by all readers of this forum as an authoritative source of aviation information and that the so called “rag” is not worth the price of it’s subscription, it is significant to point out in this particular thread that, at least to some, from the consumer’s point of view (not Cirrus’s unit profit) that the SR22 is a better value than the SR20.

Without quoting from their copyrighted article, they made two points (1) that for the additional $60,750 that the '22’s speed, usefull load and range more than make up for the difference and that (2) the GA market needs a Mooney/Piper/Lancair beater in the '22. They also observe that the current one year backlog on the '22 is a competative advantage on the two year backlong of the '20.

So, from the consumer’s point of view, at least as expressed by Aviation Consumer (yeh, I know, that rag) the SR22 is a better value.

It’s hard to imagine how the plane with the higher profit margin for the manufacturer is the better value for the consumer.

mike

30

It’s hard to imagine how the plane with the higher profit margin for the manufacturer is the better value for the consumer.

mike

Not at all hard to imagine. The SR22 competes with the Mooney Ovations and Bonanzas, and you’ll save about $200K or more by going with the SR22 for similar performance and better avionics. The SR20 competes with the likes of 182s, Archers/Arrows, which it beats handily in performance and avionics but not significantly in price (maybe $10-20K).

Gordon

31

It’s called innovation. Customers are willing to pay for it based on the utility it provides, not based on the cost to manufacture. If new products were priced that way, there would be no incentive for suppliers of goods to innovate.

It’s hard to imagine how the plane with the higher profit margin for the manufacturer is the better value for the consumer.

mike

32

Jeff,

I, for one, enjoy your posts. Sure, I take them with a grain of salt since I’m a big fan of what Cirrus has accomplished and strives to accomplish further. Nonetheless I find your observations healthy food for thought. Keep 'em coming.

33

Jeff,

I, for one, enjoy your posts. Sure, I take them with a grain of salt since I’m a big fan of what Cirrus has accomplished and strives to accomplish further. Nonetheless I find your observations healthy food for thought. Keep 'em coming.

I tend to agree with you. I always thought he was a flake, but he really hit home when he started talking about the SR20 delivery delays. Makes me wonder if some of his other comments deserve more serious attention.

34

Joe,

I spoke to Sherri Reynolds at Cirrus just last week and she told me that SR20 production is restarting in August. This explained why she couldn’t give me a specific delivery date for SR22 #95. She thought that enough SR22’s would be in the production flow at that time to make my delivery in mid-September. The lack of a firm date is due to SR20 production restart.

I don’t see why CD would say that I cannot have a firm delivery date now because of SR20 production starting up again unless this was true.

Anybody hear a different story from our friends at Cirrus Design?

George Savage

The e-mail I got from Ian said that SR20 production would START in August, not deliveries would start in August. I would think that a wait and see mode would be prudent. In the “mean” time load your “guns”. If production doesn’t start on the 20 as stated, let it hit the fan.

Mike

35

“If production doesn’t start on the 20 as stated, let it hit the fan.”

Mike

With all respect, Mike, this is an asinine comment.

Having decided to buy the “right” airplane for me and my family, I spent a day in Duluth last year looking over the company and their product, which at that time was the SR-20. The product is among the finest that one can buy in the GA market at a value that is very tough to beat. The company went out of its way to provide me with any and all information that I felt I needed to make an informed decision.

The information I requested, and that they readily provided told me that there was a very long lead time until delivery, and that the financial strength of the company was certainly a matter of concern. Under the philosophy of “let the buyer beware”, the knowledge gained by me was readily available to anyone who chose to go forward with a purchase, including you.

After thinking about it for a few days, I opted to go in a different direction, in part because of the evident financial uncertainties of the Cirrus situation against the long lead time for delivery. Was this a vote againt the company or their products? Absolutely not! Cirrus is a company of fine people that is producing fine products. Rather, it was a vote FOR an alternative approach to owning a comparable aircraft, which approach I was more comfortable with.

But for others, such as yourself, you opted to go ahead with a commitment to Cirrus, and I say good for you. But in the process, you made your decision with your eyes wide open. If you are now disappointed because Cirrus had to make some very tough business decisions affecting your lead time, those were business decisions that have been quite evident would have to be made sooner or later for Cirrus to ultimately succeed as an innovative and resourceful 21st century builder of GA aircraft. In other words, there was a known risk in plunking 15,000 non-refundable big ones on the line for a future dream.

With that in mind, I would urge you to kindly reconsider your views to “…let it hit the fan”, for the simple reason that if you successfully follow through and “…let it hit the fan”, you will have the noble distinction of perhaps bringing to a halt a wonderful and unique development in the GA world.

Then how will you feel about the guy you see in the mirror each morning?

Pete

36

“If production doesn’t start on the 20 as stated, let it hit the fan.”

Mike

With all respect, Mike, this is an asinine comment.

Having decided to buy the “right” airplane for me and my family, I spent a day in Duluth last year looking over the company and their product, which at that time was the SR-20. The product is among the finest that one can buy in the GA market at a value that is very tough to beat. The company went out of its way to provide me with any and all information that I felt I needed to make an informed decision.

The information I requested, and that they readily provided told me that there was a very long lead time until delivery, and that the financial strength of the company was certainly a matter of concern. Under the philosophy of “let the buyer beware”, the knowledge gained by me was readily available to anyone who chose to go forward with a purchase, including you.

All the above I totally agree with, except the part about the asinine comment, but that is not the point I wish to make. In my business, I make comitments to customers in price and delivery schedule. Sometimes, I must settle for less profit to honor those comitments. What I see potentially happening, and that is why I said lets wait and see what happens in August, is that comitments COULD be broken only for the sake of a more profitable sale. GM doesn’t forget about the Chevy drivers to build all Cadilacs. If you are in line at a restaurant, they don’t say “all you people who want steaks come get in front of those who want hamburgers”, at least not after promising the hungry hamburger eaters with drool running down there cheeks that there turn is next. If a business is to survive it also must honor its comitments.

After thinking about it for a few days, I opted to go in a different direction, in part because of the evident financial uncertainties of the Cirrus situation against the long lead time for delivery. Was this a vote againt the company or their products? Absolutely not! Cirrus is a company of fine people that is producing fine products. Rather, it was a vote FOR an alternative approach to owning a comparable aircraft, which approach I was more comfortable with.

But for others, such as yourself, you opted to go ahead with a commitment to Cirrus, and I say good for you. But in the process, you made your decision with your eyes wide open. If you are now disappointed because Cirrus had to make some very tough business decisions affecting your lead time, those were business decisions that have been quite evident would have to be made sooner or later for Cirrus to ultimately succeed as an innovative and resourceful 21st century builder of GA aircraft.

I think all SR20 customers were willing, some more so than others, to give Cirrus the benefit of the doubt a few months back when they suspended production of the SR 20 in favor of the “B” model SR22, their most profitable model.
If this were truly the case at the present I would not fault them, but from all info available they are not knocking on the bankruptcy judges door, at least not currently. From what I have heard they may in fact be in the best shape since I became a position holder in April of '99.

In other words, there was a known risk in plunking 15,000 non-refundable big ones on the line for a future dream. But now its time to settle up.

With that in mind, I would urge you to kindly reconsider your views to “…let it hit the fan”, for the simple reason that if you successfully follow through and “…let it hit the fan”, you will have the noble distinction of perhaps bringing to a halt a wonderful and unique development in the GA world.

I for one do not assume that I have that kind of power as one. If the kinds of numbers of customers it would take to do that were in fact motivated by actions of Cirrus Design, then this may in the end be the best for the GA world, at least under present management.

Then how will you feel about the guy you see in the mirror each morning?

Alot better than if the fan were turned toward me.

Mike

Pete

37

Mike, I tend to agree with what you’ve said. We’ve patiently waited, Cirrus has gotten a chance to better itself financially and now it’s time for them to produce - Deliver what they promised.

Does anyone really know the details of their new financial position/relationship?

I also wonder what would have been the impact if there was no SR22 to interrupt Cirrus’ routine. It had to take considerable resources to get the SR22 into production, at the expense of the SR20. In light of the fact there was an enormous sales base in the SR20 I wonder if their development of the 22 before really producing the 20 was a mistake.

One last note: anyone look at that 20 production schedule? According to it the schedule is to produce 15 in Aug, 15 in Sep, uh 29 in Oct ???, 24 in Nov, 22 in Dec, 27 in Jan, I’ll let you figure out the rest. Big question: how do they produce 29 in Oct, is something miraculous going to happen then? That’s more than 1 a (business) day. I’m not finding that schedule real reliable. :frowning:

38

Mike,

A good debate is always stimulating. Some further thoughts … given in the respectful spirit of your response.

First, the term “asinine”: According to “Webster”, it includes the concept of “silly” among its synonyms, which carries with it the idea of irrational behavior demonstrating a lack of common sense. Asinine carries with it the stronger idea of an “ass”. Perhaps “silly” would have been a more preferable term from your viewpoint, but I felt the stronger term was in order given your initial reference to use of an ass’s product.

Second, comparing General Motors and restaurants to Cirrus’ business circumstances is wholly irrational; doing so is clearly a case of comparing apples and oranges. Afer 40 years in business, I fully agree with your observation regarding the commitments one makes. Clearly, failure to follow through on commitments destroys credibility, and without credibility no business will long survive. So the question is, exactly what did Cirrus commit to do?

Looking over the Purchase Agreement I was provided, Cirrus committed to deliver on the “Actual Delivery Date”, PERIOD. Cirrus further adroitly covered itself with a section addressing “Delay in Delivery”, which provides them with substantial wiggle room regarding delays in delivery. You signed the Agreement, and therefore agreed with Cirrus that Cirrus simply committed to deliver the aircraft on the Actual Delivery Date. So what’s your point?

Bottom line: If you “…let it hit the fan”, you’re talking legal action, and those 15 K-bucks you have on deposit will disappear down a legal rat hole faster than greased lightening. In other words, you will have committed “irrational behavior demonstrating a lack of common sense”.

Third, and regarding that “benefit of the doubt” you noted, let’s be blunt. The “benefit of the doubt” didn’t start just a few months ago when Cirrus made it clear they were going to produce the SR-22 for a while. The “benefit of the doubt” began way back in time; back when people gave Cirrus the “benefit of the doubt” by plunking down their sizable deposits with a financially strapped company that had not yet matured into a strong and financially viable business enterprise.

I admire those, such as you, who chose to give Cirrus the benefit of the doubt, because each of you, in effect, chose to help finance an up and coming new company created by some very good people who have put their own financial and business lives on the line to move the GA world into the 21st century. Good for each, and all, of you. But when the inevitable bumps in the road occur, shame on those of you who may then try to destroy what many have invested so much to create, by letting “it hit the fan”.

Fourth, while the word is that Cirrus has obtained financial help this year, the company is no where near being “out of the woods”, so to speak. While I am not privy to their current financial situation, there can be no question that the company will need the infusion of significant amounts of additional capital in order to achieve a solid financial base from which they can continue as an independent and financial regenerative enterprise. “From what I have heard”, as you say, is merely hearsay, and carries little weight when compared to the harsh reality of financing an enterprise as complex in operation and as deeply in the debt and equity hole as Cirrus is.

Fifth, you say “If the kinds of numbers of customers it would take to do that were in fact motivated by actions of Cirrus Design, then this may in the end be the best for the GA world, at least under present management.” If you really believe what you wrote re current management, you would be best served selling your position - at a nice profit, I daresay, thanks to the fine efforts of that very management - and buying an SR-20 on the used market. In other words, we’re talking rational behavior and common sense here, my friend.

Finally, you concluded about the guy in the mirror, that he’d feel… “A lot better than if the fan were turned toward me.” My friend, the fan has been pointed at you ever since you courageously plunked down those 15 big ones. And to that I say once again, good for you, and I very much hope that all that fan ever blows is nice fresh air.

Pete